Search

• The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is licensed for herpes zoster prevention in ≥50-year-olds. • Post-licensure spontaneous safety reports received up to February 10, 2019 were reviewed. • Of 15,638 reports, most were non-serious, from US, and associated with known vaccine reactogenicity. • No unexpected reporting patterns were detected overall. • The RZV safety profile was consistent with that observed in clinical trials. The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) received its first marketing authorization in October 2017, for prevention of herpes zoster in individuals aged ≥50 years. We summarized safety information, following RZV administration, received by GSK via spontaneous adverse event (AE) reports submitted by healthcare providers, vaccine recipients and other reporters. Observed-to-expected (O/E) analyses were performed for selected outcomes: reports of death, Guillain–Barré syndrome and Bell's palsy. Standard case definitions were used to assess individual case reports. Data mining, using proportional reporting ratio and time-to-onset signal detection methods, was employed to identify RZV-AE pairs with disproportionate reporting or unexpected time-to-onset distribution. Between October 13, 2017 and February 10, 2019, an estimated 9.3 million doses were distributed and GSK received 15,638 spontaneous AE reports involving RZV. Most reports were classified as non-serious (95.3%) and originated from the United States (81.7%), where the majority of doses were distributed. Among reports with age or sex reported, individuals were mainly 50–69-year-olds (62.1%) and female (66.7%). Of all reports, 3,579 (22.9%) described vaccination errors, of which 82.7% were without associated symptoms. Of all vaccination error reports, most described errors of vaccine preparation and reconstitution (29.7%), inappropriate schedule or incomplete course of administration (26.7%), incorrect route of administration (16.4%), and storage errors (12.9%). The most commonly reported symptoms were consistent with the known RZV reactogenicity profile observed in clinical trials, including injection site reactions, pyrexia, chills, fatigue, headache. O/E analyses for selected outcomes and data mining analyses for all reported AEs did not identify any unexpected patterns. Review of the initial data from the post-marketing safety surveillance showed that the safety profile of RZV is consistent with that previously observed in pre-licensure clinical trials. Other studies are ongoing and planned, to continue generating real-world safety data and further characterize RZV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Compared with the general population, older adults with immune senescence and individuals who are immunocompromised (IC) due to disease or immunosuppressive therapy are at increased risk for herpes zoster (HZ) and its associated complications, which can be debilitating and life-threatening. Vaccination can be an effective strategy against HZ and studies have shown that HZ vaccination in IC individuals can elicit immune responses and provide protection from infection. Recently, the first approvals have been granted in the United States and the European Union for the recombinant HZ vaccine (RZV) in adults ≥ 18 years of age at risk of HZ due to immunodeficiency or immunosuppression. Existing systematic reviews have highlighted the risks for HZ in limited immunocompromising conditions and have only examined clinical data for RZV. This review details the risks and burden of HZ in a broad range of clinically relevant IC populations and summarizes key efficacy and safety data for RZV and live HZ vaccine in these individuals. Research has shown IC individuals can benefit from HZ vaccination; however, these insights have yet to be fully incorporated into vaccination guidelines and clinical care. Clinicians should consider HZ vaccination in eligible at-risk populations to protect against HZ and its associated complications and thereby, reduce the burden that HZ poses on the healthcare system. Electronic health records and linked personal health records could be used to identify and contact patients eligible for HZ vaccination and provide clinical decision support-generated alerts for missing or delayed vaccinations. This review will help clinicians identify eligible IC individuals who may benefit from HZ vaccination. A video abstract linked to this article is available on Figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.21517605., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: KMS has received consultancy fees from and been part of publication committees for GSK. FAF has received consultancy fees from Arena, BMS, Braintree Labs, GI reviewers, GSK, Iterative Scopes, Janssen, Pfizer and Sebela, is a stockholder in Innovation Pharmaceuticals and sits on the data safety monitoring board for Eli Lilly and Adiso Therapeutics. KLW has received consultancy fees from GSK, BMS, Pfizer, AbbVie, UCB, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Roche, Gilead, Sanofi, Regeneron, AstraZeneca and Novartis, and research grants from BMS and Pfizer. DOW, PV and FTDS are employed by, and have restricted share stock ownership in, the GSK., (Copyright © 2022 GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals S.A. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: During the clinical development of a vaccine, study participants are monitored for the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) over a defined period post-vaccination to assess the safety of prophylactic vaccines. Among the safety data collected, a standard practice in prophylactic vaccine clinical trials involves collecting reactogenicity data through daily AE solicitation of pre-defined sets of symptoms (i.e. solicited AEs)., Areas Covered: This paper aims to propose recommendations to improve and harmonize the collection of active AE solicitation in prophylactic vaccine clinical trials., Expert Opinion: We recommend using limited lists of solicited AEs adapted to the vaccine technology and target population. While the US Food and Drug Administration toxicity grading scale is commonly used in adolescents/adults, harmonizing grading criteria in infants/children would facilitate the comparison of vaccines' safety profiles. Solicited systemic AEs should not systematically be considered causally related to vaccination. Collection of solicited AEs should occur in cohorts of a maximum of 1,000 vaccinated participants, as larger cohort sizes do not improve substantially the precision of AE incidence. The incidence of daily solicited AEs should be compared with a control group for improved interpretations of their clinical relevance. These suggestions would improve the characterization of safety profiles of vaccines.

Background: CoV2 preS dTM is a stabilised pre-fusion spike protein vaccine produced in a baculovirus expression system being developed against SARS-CoV-2. We present interim safety and immunogenicity results of the first-in-human study of the CoV2 preS dTM vaccine with two different adjuvant formulations., Methods: This phase 1-2, randomised, double-blind study is being done in healthy, SARS-CoV-2-seronegative adults in ten clinical research centres in the USA. Participants were stratified by age (18-49 years and ≥50 years) and randomly assigned using an interactive response technology system with block randomisation (blocks of varying size) to receive one dose (on day 1) or two doses (on days 1 and 22) of placebo or candidate vaccine, containing low-dose (effective dose 1·3 μg) or high-dose (2·6 μg) antigen with adjuvant AF03 (Sanofi Pasteur) or AS03 (GlaxoSmithKline) or unadjuvanted high-dose antigen (18-49 years only). Primary endpoints were safety, assessed up to day 43, and immunogenicity, measured as SARS-C0V-2 neutralising antibodies (geometric mean titres), assessed on days 1, 22, and 36 serum samples. Safety was assessed according to treatment received in the safety analysis set, which included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose. Neutralising antibody titres were assessed in the per-protocol analysis set for immunogenicity, which included participants who received at least one dose, met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, had no protocol deviation, had negative results in the neutralisation test at baseline, and had at least one valid post-dose serology sample. This planned interim analysis reports data up to 43 days after the first vaccination; participants in the trial will be followed up for 12 months after the last study injection. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04537208, and is ongoing., Findings: Between Sept 3 and Sept 29, 2020, 441 individuals (299 aged 18-49 years and 142 aged ≥50 years) were randomly assigned to one of the 11 treatment groups. The interim safety analyses included 439 (>99%) of 441 randomly assigned participants (299 aged 18-49 years and 140 aged ≥50 years). Neutralising antibody titres were analysed in 326 (74%) of 441 participants (235 [79%] of 299 aged 18-49 years and 91 [64%] of 142 aged ≥50 years). There were no vaccine-related unsolicited immediate adverse events, serious adverse events, medically attended adverse events classified as severe, or adverse events of special interest. Among all study participants, solicited local and systemic reactions of any grade after two vaccine doses were reported in 81% (95% CI 61-93; 21 of 26) of participants in the low-dose plus AF03 group, 93% (84-97; 74 of 80) in the low-dose plus AS03 group, 89% (70-98; 23 of 26) in the high-dose plus AF03 group, 95% (88-99; 81 of 85) in the high-dose plus AS03 group, 29% (10-56; five of 17) in the unadjuvanted high-dose group, and 21% (8-40; six of 29) in the placebo group. A single vaccine dose did not generate neutralising antibody titres above placebo levels in any group at days 22 or 36. Among participants aged 18-49 years, neutralising antibody titres after two vaccine doses were 13·1 (95% CI 6·40-26·9) in the low-dose plus AF03 group, 20·5 (13·1-32·1) in the low-dose plus AS03 group, 43·2 (20·6-90·4) in the high-dose plus AF03 group, 75·1 (50·5-112·0) in the high-dose plus AS03 group, 5·00 (not calculated) in the unadjuvanted high-dose group, and 5·00 (not calculated) in the placebo group. Among participants aged 50 years or older, neutralising antibody titres after two vaccine doses were 8·62 (1·90-39·0) in the low-dose plus AF03 group, 12·9 (7·09-23·4) in the low-dose plus AS03 group, 12·3 (4·35-35·0) in the high-dose plus AF03 group, 52·3 (25·3-108·0) in the high-dose plus AS03 group, and 5·00 (not calculated) in the placebo group., Interpretation: The lower than expected immune responses, especially in the older age groups, and the high reactogenicity after dose two were probably due to higher than anticipated host-cell protein content and lower than planned antigen doses in the formulations tested, which was discovered during characterisation studies on the final bulk drug substance. Further development of the AS03-adjuvanted candidate vaccine will focus on identifying the optimal antigen formulation and dose., Funding: Sanofi Pasteur and Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A diligent, systematic, regular review of aggregate safety data is essential, particularly early after vaccine introduction, as this is when safety signals not identified during clinical development may emerge. In October 2017, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV; Shingrix, GSK) as the preferred vaccine for preventing herpes zoster (HZ) and related complications in immunocompetent adults aged ≥ 50 years. Subsequently, GSK experienced an unprecedented high demand for RZV. In this methodology paper, we summarize the enhanced measures undertaken to assess RZV safety during its early post-marketing experience in the USA, Canada and Germany. In addition to the routine signal-detection methods already in place for all vaccines, GSK established tailored and enhanced safety monitoring for RZV based on aggregate data of spontaneous reports and manufacturing data. Proactive, near real-time detection and evaluation of signals was a key objective. A dedicated in-house signal-detection tool customized for RZV was employed on a weekly (rather than the routine monthly) basis, allowing for a centralized, more frequent review of data on a single web-based platform. We also identified the background incidence rates of preselected medical events of interest in the first countries to introduce RZV (USA, Canada and Germany) to perform observed-to-expected analyses. This approach may offer a solution to the challenges associated with the assessment and monitoring of vaccine safety in an efficient and timely manner in the context of high vaccine uptake.